GST ASMT-10 Non-Issuance Vitiates Adjudication Order: Calcutta High Court Upholds Natural Justice in Scrutiny Proceedings
Overview of the Case
The Calcutta High Court, in the matter of Amex Services & Anr. Vs Deputy Commissioner, delivered a significant ruling affirming that the failure to furnish Form GST ASMT-10 to an assessee during return scrutiny proceedings constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice. As a direct consequence, the adjudication order passed under Section 73(9) of the WBGST & CGST Act, 2017 was held to be vitiated and kept in abeyance pending fresh proceedings.
This ruling reinforces a fundamental procedural safeguard in GST law — that an assessee must be meaningfully informed of discrepancies detected during scrutiny before any adverse order can be legally sustained against them.
Background and Facts of the Case
The petitioners in this matter — Amex Services & Anr. — were registered under the WBGST & CGST Act, 2017 and were engaged in the provision of goods transport agency services. Their GST returns for the period 1st July, 2017 to 31st March, 2018 came under scrutiny by the proper officer in exercise of powers conferred under Section 61 of the Act.
The sequence of events that gave rise to the writ petition before the Calcutta High Court was as follows:
- The proper officer scrutinized the petitioners' returns and identified certain discrepancies.
- An intimation of liability was issued to the petitioners on 26th September, 2023.
- A show cause notice was thereafter issued on 29th September, 2023.
- An adjudication order was passed on 29th December, 2023 under
Section 73(9)of the WBGST & CGST Act, 2017.
The petitioners' core grievance was straightforward yet legally significant: at no stage during this entire process — neither at the time of the intimation of liability nor at the time of issuance of the show cause notice — were they provided with Form GST ASMT-10, which is the prescribed statutory form through which an assessee is to be formally notified of discrepancies identified during scrutiny of returns.
Without access to this form, the petitioners contended that they were placed in a position where they could not meaningfully or appropriately respond to the show cause notice, rendering the entire adjudication process procedurally defective.
Legal Framework: Section 61 and Rule 99
At the heart of this dispute lie two key provisions of GST law:
Section 61 — Scrutiny of Returns
Section 61 of the WBGST & CGST Act, 2017 empowers the proper officer to scrutinize the returns filed by a registered person and related particulars to verify their correctness. Upon identifying discrepancies, the proper officer is required to intimate the registered person of such discrepancies and seek an explanation.